Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC set aside the ex parte cancellation order dated 21.02.2025, holding that the petitioner was not afforded principles of natural justice as no personal service of the show cause notice was established. The Court noted the petitioner had ceased business prior to the notice period and thus had no opportunity to respond. Relying on precedents, the HC remanded the matter to the assessing authority, directing that the petitioner be given a fair opportunity to submit a response within three weeks and be heard before a fresh order is passed. The petition was allowed by way of remand, ensuring compliance with procedural fairness.
The HC set aside the ex parte cancellation order dated 21.02.2025, holding that the petitioner was not afforded principles of natural justice as no personal service of the show cause notice was established. The Court noted the petitioner had ceased business prior to the notice period and thus had no opportunity to respond. Relying on precedents, the HC remanded the matter to the assessing authority, directing that the petitioner be given a fair opportunity to submit a response within three weeks and be heard before a fresh order is passed. The petition was allowed by way of remand, ensuring compliance with procedural fairness.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
